Advocates of homogamy often ask how government recognition of homosexual relationships will have any impact on normal marriages. Setting aside the specific answer, which is that the recognition of homogamy has already led to the elimination of the legal terms “husband,” “wife,” “father” and “mother” in some jurisdictions, the more problematic aspect is the way a modified form of Gresham’s law can be observed to apply to modern society.

Call it Dalrock’s law. When a government officially overvalues one type of relationship and undervalues another, the undervalued relationship will decline and become less societally influential, while the overvalued relationship will become more common and more influential.

The government overvaluation of homosexuality is why 4.4 percent of the characters on U.S. television are now sexually abnormal, more than double their actual percentage of the general population. The government devaluation of marital relationships is why marriage rates have been methodically declining across the West, why birth rates have fallen to sub-replacement levels, why the economic growth rates of the 1950s are, at present, demographically impossible and why social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are mathematically doomed.

The Romans did their best to halt both monetary and marital debasement. The Lex Iulia de Adulteriis Coercendis and the Lex Papia Poppaea laws introduced by the Emperor Augustus were both intended to strengthen marriage and raise the birthrate, and Rome survived in the West for another 467 years. Unfortunately for the West in general, and the U.S. in particular, our leaders appear determined to continue to debase marriage and reduce the birthrate, which will only speed up the ongoing process of societal decline and fall.

You know, gay couples have been living together for a long time now. Having a piece of paper which says they're legally married isn't going to bring about catastrophe. And keeping gay marriage illegal isn't going to keep gay people from continuing to live together.

I hope Spacebunny comes to her senses & creams his cranium with a frying pan....or better yet, dump his hinder & run off with a luscious, NeoPagan black lesbian lady for love & sapphic nookies, the latter won't require a prison sentence.

And we have, if I may borrow a phrase from Jon Stewart, another prophet up Bullshit Mountain.

"recognition of homogamy has already led to the elimination of the legal terms “husband,” “wife,” “father” and “mother” in some jurisdictions"

Who cares about legal terms? It won't affect your everyday life to put "partner" instead of "husband" on some form.

"When a government officially overvalues one type of relationship and undervalues another, the undervalued relationship will decline and become less societally influential, while the overvalued relationship will become more common and more influential."

This makes no sense whatsoever. WHO CARES? Marriages are about living the life you want with the person you love, not about being more socially influential than your neighbors.

"The government overvaluation of homosexuality is why 4.4 percent of the characters on U.S. television are now sexually abnormal, more than double their actual percentage of the general population."

National Sex Survey says that the percentage is actually around 7 or 8, so you're wrong. Not to mention it's a complete non sequitur to blame the government when it's obviously the free market deciding to be LGBT-friendly.

"The government devaluation of marital relationships is why marriage rates have been methodically declining across the West, why birth rates have fallen to sub-replacement levels, why the economic growth rates of the 1950s are, at present, demographically impossible and why social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are mathematically doomed."

You do realize that those 4.4 percent of sexually abnormal characters on television, like the remining 95.6 percent, are fictional, right? Right?

Moms will still be moms and wives will still be wives regardless of whom they are married to. Oh, and homosexuals are not sterile and the only real impact on birthrates will come from heterosexuals. You know, the people that breed homosexuals.

I swear, if it weren't for WingNutDaily, Vox Day could have a future either as a prep cook at a fast-food restaurant or a test subject for medical procedures. Or he could just scavenge through trash piles for stuff.

I really doubt if "government overevaluation of homosexuality" has anything to do with Hollywood's choices for television programming. I also doubt if "government devaluation of marital relationships" has that much influence on Western culture.

A common mistake I see among fundies is their over-estimation of government influence and power. In a representative democracy, popular culture shapes government rather than the other way around.

US economic growth rates of the 1950's are at present impossible because Europe, China, the USSR and Japan had recovered from World War II by the late 60's and the US was no longer the only game in town. Birth rates have fallen because we now have effective birth control and antibiotics have removed the fear previous generations had of losing children to disease. It had nothing to do with homosexuals.

" The government devaluation of marital relationships is why marriage rates have been methodically declining across the West, why birth rates have fallen to sub-replacement levels, why the economic growth rates of the 1950s are, at present, demographically impossible and why social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are mathematically doomed. "

Funny how you teabaggers were whining about all these things 40 years before gay marriage existed. It's almost like you blame random effects on random causes.

"When a government officially overvalues one type of relationship and undervalues another, the undervalued relationship will decline and become less societally influential, while the overvalued relationship will become more common and more influential." Yes, freakin' genius, when same-sex marriage is part of the law, it becomes more common. The only difference between same-sex marriage and opposite-sex (?) marriage is the numbers and types of genitals involved. And of course, what a book says that also says pi=3.

Well, there are some cases that fit what he's describing. For instance, the Vermont statute that legalized same-sex marriage replaced the phrase "either the bride or groom" with "either party" in explaining the process by which marriage licenses are obtained (citation).

The reason Vox is an idiot for complaining about this is that it's a fucking piece of paper. Just because the government calls you a "partner" instead of a "husband" doesn't mean you have to use that term in your actual life.

It is also worth noting this clause of the same bill, which refutes a common complaint among Christians opposed to same-sex marriage:

"No member of the clergy authorized to solemnize a marriage as set forth in subsection (a) of this section, nor societies of Friends or Quakers, the Christadelphian Ecclesia, or the Baha’i Faith shall be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of the right to religious liberty protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by Article I, Chapter 3 of the Constitution of the State of Vermont."

So yeah. You (Christians, not fishtank) don't have to marry gays if you don't want to. You don't have to be involved with them in any way. So either STFU or admit that you're bigots.

Jesus, why can't they get the idea of equality through their heads? Everything always has to be in an inferior or superior relationship to something else. Everything they like has to dominate, and if it isn't dominating, why then, it must be being dominated.
And besides, this "law" is bullshit. Gresham's law is to do with economics and to apply it to sex and relationships and marriage is completely absurd and simplistic.